Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)

He is not my ally. What the Taoiseach should have done last Thursday was acknowledge that the people he was put here to serve have given him a clear mandate with regard to the fate of the Lisbon treaty. We have also given him a comprehensive list of achievable deliverables that can be put in place in the treaty. These deliverables clearly reflected our commitment to and support for the Union despite the Taoiseach's attempt to brand us otherwise.

This debate, as the Taoiseach well knows, was never about whether Ireland is in or out of Europe. All sections of the debate agreed that Ireland's place in Europe but we in the "No" campaign believed that a better deal was possible. I still believe a better deal is possible. We articulated clearly the type of Europe we wish to shape. We are ambitious for the Union and believe its social model should be based on peace, democracy, equality and prosperity. We take those values seriously.

Sinn Féin's campaign against the treaty focused on four central areas of concern, namely, democracy, neutrality, workers' rights and public services. Workers and voters shared our concerns, as evidenced at public meetings and in national and regional letters' sections of the newspapers and radio debates for months prior to the referendum. We also outlined our concerns with respect to other issues such as trade, the developing world and the European atomic energy treaty. The people listened and voted accordingly.

Last Wednesday, my party presented the Taoiseach's office with a detailed submission on what a new treaty should contain if the concerns of the Irish, French, Dutch and many millions of people throughout Europe are to be addressed. It is time he stopped putting up obstacles to this discussion and took the solution-based approach. The people have spoken and the Lisbon treaty is over. The Taoiseach can still demand of EU leaders that the ratification process end and a new deal be negotiated. It is false to argue that the Lisbon treaty was plan B. It was not and was never intended to be. It was plan A with a new cover.

Sinn Féin's submission contains the detail of a better deal. It represents short-term strategic reforms which we believe are reasonable, practical and deliverable in the context of any upcoming new deal negotiations, but they are the minimum required in any treaty. We must have a new deal. The electorate will not accept a rerun of Lisbon. The Taoiseach knows that, I know it and every dog in the street knows it. Europe will not, and cannot, forge ahead at different speeds. It was not built that way and will collapse if it attempts to do so. To introduce a two-speed Europe would begin the process of unravelling the thread of the Union itself. Rather than deepen the democratic deficit, the Taoiseach should be seeking to close the gap between the citizens of member states and the EU institutions.

I agree there is a need for future treaties, but they must be written in clear and accessible language. There is also a need to provide all members of the public with treaty documents that clearly mark proposed changes under consideration. These must be accompanied by explanatory notes outlining in plain language the implications of such changes. These notes must also be independent and descriptive, not interpretative. Such information should be provided by either the Government or the relevant EU institution, at least six months before any future referendum so we as a society can have a full debate on the implications of all of the proposed changes to our current position within the European Union.

These measures would go a significant way towards addressing the information deficit on Europe highlighted by the electorate during the campaign. It is not good enough for elected representatives to assume the public are not interested. The huge turnout for the recent referendum showed they are interested. They have a voice and want to be heard. The continuing debate throughout Ireland and all member states suggests they are interested and have the future of Europe at heart. The dissemination of information throughout society on issues of such national importance must be taken seriously by the Government. The Taoiseach and his Government must make a real commitment to addressing this gaping hole in his relationship with the people.

The electorate and campaigners also raised further specific concerns that could easily be addressed in a new treaty. A permanent Commissioner for all member states must be retained. Arguments made in this Chamber against such a proposition have not stood up to scrutiny. We can keep the Nice treaty composition of the Commission, with a number of changes to improve its democratic accountability. Sinn Féin has proposed maintaining the Nice treaty QMV formula.

We do not see the need or do not want to see the re-emergence of the self-amending or Passerelle articles in any future treaty. These articles would allow the Council, acting by unanimity, to shift decisions from unanimity to QMV and to expand the existing competences of the European Union and alter the internal procedural working of the EU institutions without reference to the people.

Article 46A, which gives the European Union a single legal personality, must also be dropped. We want to see member state parliaments given greater scope for intervention in the EU legislative programme, the lowering of thresholds for the application of the yellow and orange card system proposed in the Lisbon treaty, the removal of the requirement for support from the European Council or Parliament to block a proposal, to legally oblige the Commission to respond to any yellow or orange card, and to give groups of member states opportunities to propose amendments to proposals on the basis of non-compliance with the aims and values of the European Union. Such changes would account for more than mere window dressing. They would deliver truly democratic EU decision making structures between member states and the EU Parliament.

Ireland, with its unique military neutral status, should seek significant amendments to the section of the Lisbon treaty dealing with common defence and security policy. Sinn Féin has proposed introducing unanimity into all aspects of common defence and security policy to explicitly recognise neutral and non-aligned states and give them the same status that was being accorded to NATO members in the Lisbon treaty. Sinn Féin has proposed the removal of the NATO compatibility requirement from the framing of common defence and security policy. We also propose including a detailed protocol explicitly protecting Irish neutrality, while maintaining the ability of the State to participate in UN-authorised peace keeping and civil and military responses to humanitarian and natural disasters.

The wording and application of any future social clause must be strengthened, specifically compelling the Commission to produce a social and equality impact assessment of all legislative proposals. The protection of public services must also be addressed. The existing protocol on services of general interest must be substantially reworded, making it a protocol on vital public services. This would allow member states to define which services should be defined as vital public services and protect such services from the application of EU rules on competition and State aid.

These are some examples of what Sinn Féin recommends. The Taoiseach and Minister have been given our document and, hopefully, will use it to address the concerns of the Irish electorate when a new treaty is being negotiated over the next number of years.

See this speech in context